From: "Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)" <vbabka@kernel.org>
To: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <cascardo@igalia.com>,
Salvatore Dipietro <dipiets@amazon.it>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hch@infradead.org,
abuehaze@amazon.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
alisaidi@amazon.com, blakgeof@amazon.com, brauner@kernel.org,
dgc@kernel.org, dipietro.salvatore@gmail.com, djwong@kernel.org,
hannes@cmpxchg.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, mhocko@suse.com,
ritesh.list@gmail.com, rvvandan@amazon.com,
stable@vger.kernel.org, surenb@google.com, willy@infradead.org,
ziy@nvidia.com, "David Hildenbrand" <david@redhat.com>,
"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@lst.de>,
"Dmitry Ilvokhin" <d@ilvokhin.com>,
"Brendan Jackman" <brendan.jackman@linux.dev>,
"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] mm/page_alloc: avoid direct reclaim and compaction for costly __GFP_NORETRY allocations
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2026 09:15:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4d0e9017-18cb-4344-8f7f-414d708b4e9d@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <auuDXDglZ-Z1LZhA@quatroqueijos.cascardo.eti.br>
On 11/4/26 20:11, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2026 at 08:21:51AM +0000, Salvatore Dipietro wrote:
>> Commit 5d8edfb900d5 ("iomap: Copy larger chunks from userspace")
>> introduced high-order folio allocations in the iomap buffered write
>> path. When memory is fragmented, each failed costly-order allocation
>> enters __alloc_pages_slowpath() which runs direct reclaim, direct
>> compaction and drain_all_pages(), causing a 0.38x throughput drop on
>> PostgreSQL pgbench (simple-update) with 1024 clients on a 96-vCPU arm64
>> system.
>>
>> The root issue is that direct reclaim and direct compaction are too
>> expensive for hot allocation paths that have fallbacks to smaller
>> allocations. __filemap_get_folio_mpol() already marks higher-order
>> allocations with __GFP_NORETRY | __GFP_NOWARN, signalling that the
>> caller can handle failure. However, the page allocator still enters the
>> full blocking slowpath for costly orders with __GFP_NORETRY, which is
>> unnecessarily aggressive when the caller will simply retry at a lower
>> order.
>>
>> For costly-order allocations with __GFP_NORETRY, clear
>> __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM at the very start of the slowpath, before
>> can_direct_reclaim, can_compact and the nofail checks are evaluated.
>> This makes the entire slowpath treat the request as non-blocking: no
>> direct reclaim, no direct compaction and no drain_all_pages() IPI
>> across every CPU. Reclaim and compaction move to the background
>> instead: kswapd is still woken for reclaim, and it wakes kcompactd for
>> defragmentation. The system keeps its long-term health while the
>> latency-critical direct allocation path no longer stalls.
>>
>> Allocations that also request __GFP_THISNODE are exempted. That flag
>> pairing identifies the local-node-first THP attempt issued by
>> alloc_pages_mpol() (mempolicy.c), which relies on direct compaction to
>> form transparent huge pages.
>>
>> Clearing __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM makes these allocations reach the
>> !can_direct_reclaim bailout, which since commit 4c0ed883e051
>> ("mm/page_alloc: fix defrag_mode for non-reclaimable allocations") drops
>> ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT and retries instead of failing when defrag_mode is on.
>> With vm.defrag_mode=1 a __GFP_NORETRY allocation could therefore succeed
>> by fragmenting another migratetype's pageblock. That is the wrong trade
>> for a caller that has already communicated it can handle failure and has
>> a cheap lower-order fallback, so exclude __GFP_NORETRY from the
>> relaxation. The exclusion is not restricted to costly orders: any
>> __GFP_NORETRY caller has said it can cope with failure, so failing is
>> preferable to fragmenting for all of them.
>>
>> Test environment:
>> Hardware: AWS EC2 m8g.24xlarge (96 vCPU, arm64)
>> 12x 1TB IO2 32000 IOPS RAID0 XFS
>> OS: AL2023
>> Kernel: v7.3-rc1
>> Database: PostgreSQL 18.4
>> Workload: pgbench simple-update, 1024 clients, 96 threads, 1200s
>>
>> Results (average of 3 runs, TPS):
>>
>> Config Avg TPS % vs baseline
>> v7.3-rc1 baseline (vm.defrag_mode=0) 58,602 -
>> v7.3-rc1 + this patch (vm.defrag_mode=0) 157,246 +168.3%
>> v7.3-rc1 baseline (vm.defrag_mode=1) 109,012 -
>> v7.3-rc1 + this patch (vm.defrag_mode=1) 157,778 +44.7%
>>
>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260403193535.9970-1-dipiets@amazon.it/T/#t [v1]
>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260420161404.642-1-dipiets@amazon.it/T/#u [v2]
>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260710143437.12379-1-dipiets@amazon.it/T/#u [v3]
>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260904115629.3993331-1-dipiets@amazon.it/T/#u [v4]
>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260911142102.2294202-1-dipiets@amazon.it/T/#u [v5]
>> Fixes: 5d8edfb900d5 ("iomap: Copy larger chunks from userspace")
>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
>> Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>
>> Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
>> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
>> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
>> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
>> Cc: Dave Chinner <dgc@kernel.org>
>> Cc: Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
>> Cc: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
>> Cc: Dmitry Ilvokhin <d@ilvokhin.com>
>> Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
>> Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
>> Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>> Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) <vbabka@kernel.org>
>> Acked-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
>> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
>> Signed-off-by: Salvatore Dipietro <dipiets@amazon.it>
>> ---
>> mm/page_alloc.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++++---
>> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> index 12fac9084c48..64d09964ca77 100644
>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> @@ -4784,10 +4784,10 @@ static inline struct page *
>> __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
>> struct alloc_context *ac)
>> {
>> - bool can_direct_reclaim = gfp_mask & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM;
>> - bool can_compact = can_direct_reclaim && gfp_compaction_allowed(gfp_mask);
>> - bool nofail = gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL;
>> const bool costly_order = order > PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER;
>> + bool can_direct_reclaim;
>> + bool can_compact;
>> + bool nofail;
>> struct page *page = NULL;
>> unsigned int alloc_flags;
>> unsigned long did_some_progress;
>> @@ -4802,6 +4802,18 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
>> bool can_retry_reserves = true;
>> unsigned long alloc_start_time = jiffies;
>>
>> + /*
>> + * Costly __GFP_NORETRY callers have a cheap fallback, so don't stall
>> + * them in reclaim or compaction. __GFP_THISNODE callers are exempt.
>> + */
>> + if (costly_order && (gfp_mask & __GFP_NORETRY) &&
>> + !(gfp_mask & __GFP_THISNODE))
>> + gfp_mask &= ~__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM;
>> +
>> + can_direct_reclaim = gfp_mask & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM;
>> + can_compact = can_direct_reclaim && gfp_compaction_allowed(gfp_mask);
>> + nofail = gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL;
>> +
>> if (unlikely(nofail)) {
>> /*
>> * Also we don't support __GFP_NOFAIL without __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM,
>
> This would trigger a warning if __GFP_NOFAIL and __GFP_NORETRY were ever
> used together, though that does not make sense and I haven't found a case
> where it is used in practice.
Right. But always there is some risk someone does that unintentionally by
trying to turn an allocation with incoming gfp flags (including unexpected
__GFP_NOFAIL) to an opportunistic one first by appending __GFP_NORETRY, etc.
> Aside from either warning for the specific case of these flags being used
> together or adding a comment right here to that effect, I don't think any
> other change is needed, though.
Indeed. I thought we did have such warnings. Also a combination with
__GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL would make no sense. So we should perhaps add them.
> Another comment about the general approach: TTM pool page allocator does
> use __GFP_NORETRY and __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM for high orders and when we
> previously suggested to drop __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM to avoid compaction, it
> was frowned upon. In the end, a lot of other changes were made and for the
> relevant cases, this does not seem to change its current behavior, amongst
> other things, because it uses __GFP_THISNODE.
>
> I did run some TTM GTT allocations with some fragmentation workload and I
> haven't seen much change in the latency for these high order allocations,
> so:
>
> Tested-by: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <cascardo@igalia.com>
Thanks!
>> @@ -4918,8 +4930,11 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
>> * Reclaim/compaction cannot run, so defrag_mode's strategy
>> * of enforcing ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT cannot be fulfilled. Allow
>> * fallbacks rather than failing the allocation outright.
>> + * Not for __GFP_NORETRY: those have a cheap lower order
>> + * fallback, so failing beats fragmenting.
>> */
>> if (defrag_mode && (alloc_flags & ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT) &&
>> + !(gfp_mask & __GFP_NORETRY) &&
>> (gfp_mask & __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)) {
>> alloc_flags &= ~ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT;
>> goto retry;
>>
>> base-commit: cee9395acd8043be0644b25c34bfa86623f2b935
>> --
>> 2.50.1
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> AMAZON DEVELOPMENT CENTER ITALY SRL, viale Monte Grappa 3/5, 20124 Milano, Italia, Registro delle Imprese di Milano Monza Brianza Lodi REA n. 2504859, Capitale Sociale: 10.000 EUR i.v., Cod. Fisc. e P.IVA 10100050961, Societa con Socio Unico
>>
>>
>>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-05 8:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-01 8:21 Salvatore Dipietro
2026-10-02 1:29 ` Andrew Morton
2026-10-02 8:23 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-10-02 22:28 ` Andrew Morton
2026-11-04 19:11 ` Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo
2026-11-05 8:15 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4d0e9017-18cb-4344-8f7f-414d708b4e9d@kernel.org \
--to=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=abuehaze@amazon.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alisaidi@amazon.com \
--cc=blakgeof@amazon.com \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=brendan.jackman@linux.dev \
--cc=cascardo@igalia.com \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=d@ilvokhin.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=dgc@kernel.org \
--cc=dipietro.salvatore@gmail.com \
--cc=dipiets@amazon.it \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=rvvandan@amazon.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®